My grandparents came to the United States from Italy. I am proud of my Italian heritage. I am not proud of the Italian criminal justice system. It is dysfunctional and unfair. There are long delays before an accused person gets his or her day in court. There is no presumption of innocence. Strict rules of evidence do not apply. Judges go into the jury room to “help” the jurors reach a verdict. But perhaps the worst thing about that system is its failure to recognize the concept of “double jeopardy,” something our founders wrote into our Constitution’s Bill of Rights. Simply put, an accused person who is found not guilty cannot be tried again for the same crime. Not so in Italy. Witness the six-year long travail of Amanda Knox. In their first trial, Ms. Knox and her former boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, were convicted of murder. Later they were acquitted by an appellate court. In the United States that would have ended the case. There are no appeals of acquittals here. Not so, in Italy. The acquittal was appealed to even a higher court. Ms. Knox did not appear at that trial, understandably, after having spent four years in prison before she was acquitted, and fearing she might once again be found guilty. The new court in Florence retried the case before a jury of two judges and six lay jurors; that jury gave its verdict on January 30th after deliberating less than a day. Guilty! This case illustrates the wisdom of our founders in guaranteeing finality, in that nobody can be retried for a crime, after that person has once been acquitted of that crime. Double jeopardy in the United States is more than a quiz show. It is a fundamental right of Americans accused of crime.

Today, January 6th, is the date of the Epiphany, which is more celebrated in many countries than Christmas. Generally, this Greek-originated word means an “aha” moment, when one suddenly sees or understands something in a new or very clear way. Religiously, it is a Christian holy day honoring the travel of the three kings to visit the Christ child. The concept of gift-giving at Christmas time originated with the gift-giving of the three kings or Magi, to which they are sometimes referred. Their three gifts were gold, frankincense (simply, incense) and myrrh. Gold was the traditional metal of royalty and signifies the kingship of Christ. (Frank)incense for centuries has been used in religious services, as a prayer to deities. It signifies the divinity of Christ. Myrrh was a burial ointment. It signifies that Christ was human and suffered death. In my ancestral country of Italy, gifts are passed out by La Beffana (meaning Epiphany), a female form of Santa Claus on the 6th of January. This is just one example of the richness of religious customs throughout the world and in every religion. It is good to keep the old customs relevant for all time.

The votes are in for which Halloween costume Maxx the cat should wear and 75% of voters chose the Angry Bird costume over the bumble bee. However, in a surprising turn of events, Maxx has revolted and refused to allow his owner to put the costume back on.

Rumor has it that Mr. Messina was seen around the office with bandages on his hands and arms and the photo below circulated through email. I guess we know who wears the pants in that relationship and who wears the costume.

My name is Maxx. I am being held against my will. Truly, I have few complaints. I am loved, get lots of attention, eat well and my every need is satisfied. However, now I’m held hostage in my own home through no fault of my own. This is because my so-called owner, the aging one with the curly hair and glasses, thinks I am coyote-bait.

It appears there are coyotes running wild in our neighborhood. In fact, a few weeks ago, a coyote was trailing me one morning. My owner saw him, yelled and chased him way. I wish he’d given me a shot at him. My two remaining fangs were poised to sink into that doggy’s butt.

I am told my imprisonment is for my own safety, but I’d like to go toe to toe with that stupid mutt. I look out the window and see other cats and small dogs romping in the great outdoors and I’m seeing green. If the coyotes are so tough, why are those other pets all safe outside? Maybe I’m a bigger tastier morsel.

I ask my readers to make comments and send suggestions regarding control of the coyotes. I miss strolling through my streets, where I once was king of the ‘hood. I want my freedom!!

Most of us have heard the term “beyond a reasonable doubt,” used in connection with criminal trials. What does that really mean? The term is used in the jury instructions for criminal cases. Jurors are told that they can only find the defendant guilty if they are convinced "beyond a reasonable doubt" of his or her guilt. Sometimes referred to as "to a moral certainty," the phrase is fraught with uncertainty as to meaning, but try: “you had better be very convinced.” By comparison it is meant to be a tougher standard than "preponderance of the evidence" used as a test to give judgment to a plaintiff in a civil (non-criminal) case. At the beginning of a criminal trial, the defendant is vested with what is called the ”presumption of innocence.” Despite the fact that he or she is in court after having been arrested means nothing at that point. The jury must presume the person is innocent and that must continue until the prosecution produces evidence that not only overcomes the presumption but that clearly establishes guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt.” While the Court defines “reasonable doubt” for jurors, the complicated language often leads to results that seem to defy what is shown by the evidence. In that case, jurors will decide with their gut feelings rather than following the strict language of the law. Two celebrated cases illustrate this. In the recent case of Florida v. George Zimmerman, the majority of people polled believe the defendant should have been convicted of something; the jury acquitted. In the older and more notorious case of California v. O. J. Simpson, the jury acquitted despite public opinion that the evidence of guilt was overwhelming. Then, unfortunately the opposite is true. Innocent people are convicted and go to prison or suffer the death penalty. DNA evidence in recent years has proven that.

So, while jurors may be confused by jury instructions to the extent that they may ignore them, the American system is still the best in the world, despite its flaws.

I was born on December 11, 1939 into an immigrant Italian household in Tacoma, Washington. World War II was in its first weeks. Hitler was running wild in Europe. Italy, his willing partner. Japan made noise China and the Pacific.On December 7, 1941, the Japanese hit Pearl Harbor. On my second birthday, four days later, Germany and Italy, my family’s native homeland, declared war on the United States. My grandparents had to declare themselves as ”enemy aliens,” despite the fact that they sent three sons to defend our country and possibly fight against their Italian cousins. At 73, I have lived a fairly long time. I muse over some of the terrible things that have happened just in my lifetime. A war that killed 55 million civilians and military combatants; the use of nuclear weapons that destroyed whole cities; genocide by the Nazis; the Communist Chinese and Soviets killing millions of their citizens through force and starvation; a world where bloody conflict was taking place every day since the day I was born; the indiscriminate use of the death penalty in places like China and Iran and, to a lesser degree, the United States also; the massacre of innocents by governments and rebels in places like Rwanda and Bosnia; madmen who have had access to firearms killing children and other innocents; governmental and religious killings in the 21st century in Syria, Angola, Afghanistan, and other places; a wave of terrorism by religious fanatics, which led to the deaths of 3,000 innocent Americans on September 11, 2001; continued hatred among peoples of different colors.In the sixties there was a song that had a line, “When will they ever learn….” Not in my lifetime. And now we have witnessed the birth of the future King, George VII, in England. With normal life expectancies, he will rule into the 22nd Century. By the end of his rule, I wonder if they still have never learned.